home

4th Circuit Strikes Down Statute on Indefinite Civil Commitment of Sex Offenders

In a unanimous panel decision, the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals struck down 18 U.S.C. 4248, which authorized the indefinite civil commitment of individuals whom the Bureau of Prisons deemed "sexually dangerous." The appeals court relied heavily on United States v. Morrison and United States v. Lopez, and upheld the district court ruling which stated that Congress lacked the enumerated power to encroach on the general mental health and police powers reserved to the states.

After carefully considering the Government’s arguments, we conclude, for the reasons set forth below, that § 4248 does indeed lie beyond the scope of Congress’s authority. The Constitution does not empower the federal government to confine a person solely because of asserted "sexual dangerousness" when the Government need not allege (let alone prove) that this "dangerousness" violates any federal law. We therefore affirm the judgment of the district court.

The opinion (available here (pdf)) represents the first circuit court opinion to rule on the constitutionality of 18 U.S.C. 4248. District courts addressing it have been divided.

Congrats to the Federal Defenders in Raleigh, NC who presented the successful challenge.

< Colorado U.S. Attorney Resigns | Profile of a Criminal Defense Attorney >
  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


  • Display: Sort:
    i kind of wondered how (5.00 / 1) (#1)
    by cpinva on Fri Jan 09, 2009 at 12:17:03 AM EST
    those statutes weren't violative of the "double jeapardy" clause? you're essentially being punished twice, once for the crime you actually committed, and again for a crime you might, or might not, commit at some unknown future date.

    hang on there... (none / 0) (#2)
    by legion on Fri Jan 09, 2009 at 09:22:02 AM EST
    ...so, it's not that indefinite imprisonment is wrong per se, it's just that the Constitution doesn't allow the federal gov't to do it? But it's perfectly legit if individual states do?

    I'm not sure this decision is highly beneficial...

    Supreme Court (none / 0) (#3)
    by diogenes on Fri Jan 09, 2009 at 10:42:12 PM EST
    As I recall, the Supreme Court has let other such laws (Kansas?) stand.  I'm sure this one will go to the Supreme Court as well.
    These committed people are not people with a single offense of sex with a 15 year old.  Maybe a legal person can list the number of crimes committed by each.  And there is no cure for repeat, violent sexual predators.